Corbitt v. Harrington

Citations

• 14 Wash. 197
• 44 P. 132
• 1896 Wash. LEXIS 337

Syllabus

<p>PLEADING — INCONSISTENT DEFENSES — SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE — NEW TRIAL.</p> <p>A denial of sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the allegations of a complaint that the plaintiff, at the request of a firm composed of one defendant and the intestate of the other defendant, executed a written guaranty in their behalf, and an affirmative defense that, if the guaranty was executed, its execution was for the purpose of defrauding the firm or one of the members thereof, may be included in the same answer, as they are not necessarily inconsistent defenses.</p> <p>Setting aside a verdict and granting a new trial is more or less a discretionary matter; and the action of the court in so doing will not be reversed, unless it clearly appears that the discretion has been abused.</p> <p>An order setting aside a verdict for defendants and granting a new trial on the ground that their evidence did not sustain their affirmative defense will not be disturbed on appeal, although the only evidence of a fact essential to plaintiff’s recovery was a purported signature on an instrument erroneously admitted, where no specific objection was made that the signature had not been proved.</p>